Why are the scores so high this year?

[Anonymous]

Personally, I think every student admitted to Level IV should be subject to a probationary period of one year. That would weed out those who, for whatever reason, cannot withstand the rigors of the program. It also might give the county more insight into the strengths and weaknesses of the screening process.

I refuse to believe that a child's academic future should be decided solely on his ability to fill out bubbles on a worksheet on a given morning in October. Too many other variables at work, particularly when we are talking about giftedness.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I refuse to believe that a child's academic future should be decided solely on his ability to fill out bubbles on a worksheet on a given morning in October.

It's not.

[Anonymous]

Did they happen to mention if there was a subsection of the CoGat that mattered more than others? For example, it was said on some other thread that nonverbal was considered the least predictive of the scores with respect to ultimate success in AAP-does that mean the quantitative or verbal subtest scores will matter more?

[Anonymous]

I've heard but have no real proof that the nonverbal scores count less and verbal counts the most - I think a teacher told me that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Did they happen to mention if there was a subsection of the CoGat that mattered more than others? For example, it was said on some other thread that nonverbal was considered the least predictive of the scores with respect to ultimate success in AAP-does that mean the quantitative or verbal subtest scores will matter more?

No mention was made of one subtest score mattering more than another subtest score.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I've heard but have no real proof that the nonverbal scores count less and verbal counts the most - I think a teacher told me that.

Perhaps a psychologist out there can answer to this, but I would think that high nonverbal scores would be a better judge of giftedness, if any, on these tests.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've heard but have no real proof that the nonverbal scores count less and verbal counts the most - I think a teacher told me that.

Perhaps a psychologist out there can answer to this, but I would think that high nonverbal scores would be a better judge of giftedness, if any, on these tests.

I have a child who tops the charts with non-verbal, but has above average, not quoted gifted range verbal. I was told by AART non-verbal is not a good predictor of academic success. Verbal is a better predictor, apparently.

[Anonymous]

I've heard that too, and it plays out on the "scores" threads. Verbal trumps nonverbal scotes.

[Anonymous]

Correction, scores.

[Anonymous]

21:39 here. FWIW, my child is in AAP and getting mostly A's with a B sprinkled in here and there, so it worked out for us anyway.

[Anonymous]

My dd has all scores in the 99th percentile, but as for the cogat, the nonverbal was lowest, verbal was a little higher, and significantly higher on quantitative. I guess we'll see how it plays out in May.

[Anonymous]

DD had scores all in the 99th as well. But keep in mind, e that is a range from 130 to 160 composite. My DD's composite was 152. Verbal and Quant. 148, NonVerb. 138.
I was worried that because her academics were only mid-high she might not get in AA. I think it's the best environment for her because she "spaces out" in class a lot. Her teacher says it's due to boredom. Though I was skeptical at first, her teacher insists she's seen it many times with other gifted children. None-the-less AART and principal tell me that even if she were coached for the test (btw she wasn't) it would matter. According to them the higher level of thinking required to get those scores requires gifted abilities that cannot be coached.
So my advice to worried moms out there is, really take a close look at your child. If they barely made 130's on the composite or missed 130's on any subtests consider keeping them in gen ed so they can enjoy being at the top of the class instead of pushing them for the AA program where they could easily begin to fall behind or worse feel like they don't measure up. That's what the AA teacher told me she would tell most parents who refer or barely make the pool. She also said my daughters scores were likely somewhere around 99.8th percentile and that if she and the other AA teachers had things their way they would break down scores and take 99.5 percent and up composite scores. Then coaching would be impossible and they could go back to working with gifted children as opposed to struggling with high achievers who lack ideas because academics have been pushed on them, it doesn't come naturally. Her words not mine. She went on to say AA is not just about studying beyond your grade level it's about the way you learn and your capacity to understand and expound upon higher level concepts. I hope this helps moms who are trying to decide if the program is right for their child. I know it seems like they put a lot of emphasis on the test but it's the best snap shot of a child's ability. WISC IV (though it costs too much to use by the school) is an even better means of identifying gifted kids. As opposed to the GBRS which is highly objective. Anyway that's my tiny two cents.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So my advice to worried moms out there is, really take a close look at your child. If they barely made 130's on the composite or missed 130's on any subtests consider keeping them in gen ed so they can enjoy being at the top of the class instead of pushing them for the AA program where they could easily begin to fall behind or worse feel like they don't measure up. .

My DC is in this camp. Did 99th percentile (140) on one subtest. Others were ok, but composite was 130. We are not referring or pursuing AAP. It certainly would have been flattering to be offered AAP (even if we referred DC), but we believe our child is "normal smart" not "over-the-top-freaky smart." DC will be fine getting an education at the base school. I know other parents who feel this way too. We want our kids to be kids and not to stress about keeping up with the Jones. I'm proud that my child is a very good student, right where s/he is.

My point to all the first grade and second grade parents is: It's OK to be a regular, normal kid. It's GREAT if your child is anywhere in the top 10% of the students who took NNAT or CogAT! That's quite an accomplishment! Even though many people are vying for spots in the AAP program, you don't HAVE to follow suit. There are people who don't buy into the hype and competition. You are not a bad parent for sending your smart kid to the base school. And lastly, please, please don't put stress on your child by telling him that he almost made the cut-off or she might get to go to the smart school. Kids DON't need to know about this stuff. We should not be hearing stories of kids crying when they found out they didn't get in to AAP. (Nor should we hear stories of adults crying. This is not a crying matter.)

While my child will lose some friends/classmates to AAP, DC is going to have a good education in the base school and when s/he gets to high school, THEN DC can decide if honors and AP classes are in DC's ambitions.

Tyr not to make the whole AAP thing more than it really is. The base schools, while not perfect, are not condemning your child to a life of menial jobs. Really!

[Anonymous]

Are there actually stories of kids who cried because they hadn't made AAP??? Seriously?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:DD had scores all in the 99th as well. But keep in mind, e that is a range from 130 to 160 composite. My DD's composite was 152. Verbal and Quant. 148, NonVerb. 138.
I was worried that because her academics were only mid-high she might not get in AA. I think it's the best environment for her because she "spaces out" in class a lot. Her teacher says it's due to boredom. Though I was skeptical at first, her teacher insists she's seen it many times with other gifted children. None-the-less AART and principal tell me that even if she were coached for the test (btw she wasn't) it would matter. According to them the higher level of thinking required to get those scores requires gifted abilities that cannot be coached.
So my advice to worried moms out there is, really take a close look at your child. If they barely made 130's on the composite or missed 130's on any subtests consider keeping them in gen ed so they can enjoy being at the top of the class instead of pushing them for the AA program where they could easily begin to fall behind or worse feel like they don't measure up. That's what the AA teacher told me she would tell most parents who refer or barely make the pool. She also said my daughters scores were likely somewhere around 99.8th percentile and that if she and the other AA teachers had things their way they would break down scores and take 99.5 percent and up composite scores. Then coaching would be impossible and they could go back to working with gifted children as opposed to struggling with high achievers who lack ideas because academics have been pushed on them, it doesn't come naturally. Her words not mine. She went on to say AA is not just about studying beyond your grade level it's about the way you learn and your capacity to understand and expound upon higher level concepts. I hope this helps moms who are trying to decide if the program is right for their child. I know it seems like they put a lot of emphasis on the test but it's the best snap shot of a child's ability. WISC IV (though it costs too much to use by the school) is an even better means of identifying gifted kids. As opposed to the GBRS which is highly objective. Anyway that's my tiny two cents.

Well, I guess I got just a little carried away with this post and wrote too much. What I should have said, succinctly, is my kid is the smartest child in the universe, don't you agree? And your dumb ass kid in the 98th percentile should stay the hell out of my kid's way. Your urchin belongs in Gen. Ed. with the unwashed masses. There now. Just putting it into words makes me feel so superior. I'm waiting for agreement. Still waiting.